Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Jeff Younger ·
Dec 14, 2011 at 7:32am
Ron Paul gains support from "new voters, young voters, and non-Republican voters" to close within one point of Newt.
Paul has sterling credentials for repealing Obamacare and other government intrusions. He's consistently opposed government advances against private enterprise for twenty-four years. Newt and Romney supported the individual mandate in the past, although they repudiate it now.
The establishment candidates have the same problem with global warming and many other big government initiatives. How important is that to Paul's surge?
- Comment (36)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments :
Dec '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Paul appeals to political arsonists. He is a bellweather on the national mood. Apparently, there is a lot of 'burn it all down' out there.
I just cant get past the nonsense, and conflating 'I dont like it' with 'unconstitutional' or 'libretarian.'
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
I'm a libertarian and he's the candidate I agree with most of the time. Unfortunately, a few of the areas where I disagree make him a non-viable option for me. But I think people underestimate his appeal to garden-variety conservatives. He's much more principled and less corrupt (though certainly not perfect on even that score, as Ben Domenech pointed out yesterday) than the others.
I am deeply concerned with how involved we are in so many disputes, rendering our ability to fight on any individual front more difficult. But I think he's criminally naive about the threats that face us. So I don't support him -- what with the existential crisis and al. But I think some GOPers mistake things. They see how supportive social conservatives or economic conservatives have been to the coalition but forget that we weren't on board with the foreign policy in general. This could seriously help Paul as a consistent pro-lifer and economic conservative.
Apr '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Mollie, I have similar misgiving about Paul. I've decided, on balance, he's the best candidate to repeal Obamacare and limit government. But it's an on-balance decision, for sure.
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
I *definitely* think he's the best candidate to have both the knowledge and wherewithal to repeal Obamacare and limit the size and scope of our government in general. What I'm worried about is how that would play out in practical terms with regards to our defense. And I'm actually at the extreme when it comes to the size and scope of our military -- I want them seriously downsized. But I don't understand how he plans to accomplish that and when he talks about it, all I can see is a nuclear war or some catastrophe like that.
Sep '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
He won't play well in the general, but he may be able to win because his message is a clear one and he understands the root of the problem. However, he is IMHO an outsider with little executive experience. It is one thing to criticize a distressed political system's faults and quite another to do something about it.
I see a Paul presidency as having the most vetoes ever.
May '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
But I don't understand how he plans to accomplish that and when he talks about it, all I can see is a nuclear war or some catastrophe like that. · Dec 14 at 6:28am
Well I support Ron Paul's foreign policy position. And that's perhaps the most unreported aspect here--that Paul receives more support from military members and veterans than any other GOP candidate.
Even if he was as extreme as he sometimes sounds, which I doubt, (bring back all our troops, everywhere, next month), it's not as though he would have no opposition or that he would not run into the same constraints other Presidents have faced.
You said "nuclear war or some catastrophe like that." And you said it well. To me, we're all victims of the vague fear-mongering that influences voters and allows the media to (dis)regard Paul as a naive kook.
But the military is a bureaucracy, a big one, and as such, it's also an efficient propaganda machine. I know. I've experienced it firsthand over and over.
If the EPA gets disbanded, all our coastal cities will flood. Haven't you heard?
May '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Ross Conatser:
I see a Paul presidency as having the most vetoes ever. · Dec 14 at 6:47am
And that's bad because?
Jul '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
It's only one poll and it's the notoriously poor PPP poll.
Take a look at actual data here.
Aug '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
What I'm worried about is how that would play out in practical terms with regards to our defense. And I'm actually at the extreme when it comes to the size and scope of our military -- I want them seriously downsized. But I don't understand how he plans to accomplish that and when he talks about it, all I can see is a nuclear war or some catastrophe like that. · Dec 14 at 6:28am
This is an interesting topic, Mollie. Would you like to collaborate on a post that delves into this issue?
I would admit up front that I am in the other camp - I think Defense spending is about half of what it needs to be, given our stated responsibilities - but I am willing to go where the data goes.
Jun '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
It's hard to believe that the Christian Right will turn out for Ron Paul, once they've listened to his foreign policy. And Iowa is one of the places where the religious vote really matters.
Apr '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Michael Tee: It's only one poll and it's the notoriously poor PPP poll.
Take a look at actual data here. · Dec 14 at 7:38am
The actual data is pretty good for Paul, too. While Newt has been climbing in national polls, he's been falling in Iowa. Paul's support has been climbing in Iowa. My guess is that there's more intensity behind him, which is, of course, essential in any caucus state and particularly in Iowa. It's also my guess that this is partly why you're seeing things like the Newt Iowa campaign manager "Cult of Mormon" line (followed by his firing, but still putting it more into play).
May '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
I would prefer to think of it as adhering to political principles rather than arson. This is something that has bubbled to the surface on the recent weeks.
We hear from various members that this candidate is too "X" and that one is too "Y" and the other one(s) too "Z". We also hear that members are planning to hold their collective noses to vote for the eventual candidate.
We are told that this election is "critical" and that there may be no return if Obama is re-elected.
We were told this when GHW Bush, Bob Dole, GW Bush & McCain were running. What would have happened had we conservatives rejected each or any of these choices? Where would we be now if the republican establishment had finally gotten the message that conservatives can and will win?
What would be the result of staying home on election day because the R candidate is too "big government"? (Yeah, I know Obama would probably win. I talking about internal Republican consequences.)
Sep '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Were Paul by some amazing turn of fate to get the GOP nomination, he would be pilloried by the Dems for the horrible newsletters he let go out in his name in the 1990s that were unbelievably racist (authorship of which he has both denied and admitted). Not to mention that he's pro-life (which is fine, but from a government perspective not very libertarian and, also, one of the big issues—whether or not it should be—for a lot of independents). He would completely fail in the general election. But say he won, do we really want another aloof, do as I say not as I do, I don't care what anyone else thinks president? One term of disaster at the altar of theory?!?! I happen to be a libertarian (differing with the usual suspects only about foreign policy), but I find Ron Paul about as unappealing as I find Obama, and I think he would be just as unsuccessful for many of the same reasons.
Edited on Dec 14, 2011 at 8:53amRe: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Instugator
This is an interesting topic, Mollie. Would you like to collaborate on a post that delves into this issue?
I would admit up front that I am in the other camp - I think Defense spending is about half of what it needs to be, given our stated responsibilities - but I am willing to go where the data goes. · Dec 14 at 7:59am
Well, I'm not quite feeling inspired to do a "Case For/Against Slashing Defense Spending" post right at this moment but might make for a good discussion. Let's revisit in a bit ... Or you could just write your case and we could have the discussion from that point ...
Jul '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
I really like a great deal of Paul's domestic policy. I believe he not only appeals to his base but also that of disaffected TP members. The fact that for now my primary vote will go for someone who as a lobbyist represents so much of what I despise should elucidate the general disagreement of his foreign policy among libertarian leaning people.
Should the odd happen and he gets the nod then he gets my vote like all the others if they get the nod.
May '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
As is reported all over, Paul has a strong field organization in Iowa, built up over many years. Even if the poll data didn't show him to be strong, he would be expected to outperform the polls because his on-the-ground organization will get people out to the caucuses. A large chunk of the Newt poll-response supporters simply won't bother to go.
The other misconception is Iowa objection to Paul's isolationist policies (BTW, I strongly disagree with my friend Brandon). I lived in Iowa for several years, my second daughter was born there, I know the place well. Iowa is the most isolationist and pacifist state in the Midwest. Tom Harkin wins over and over on that plank alone.
Iowa is Paul's natural constituency. Huckabee, even though his positions were thoroughly internationalist, was not the Iowa "hawk" in 2008. That was McCain, who finished fourth. Paul's "come home America, stop spending money on wars" message goes over very well there.
Apr '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
For what it's worth, Newy has dropped six points nationally in the last week, so a drop in Iowa seems pretty believable.
http://www.gallup.com/poll/151514/Gingrich-Continues-Lead-GOP-Field-Smaller-Margin.aspx
Jun '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
This kind of stupid is why Iowa must be removed from the first states to have a primary. They and their system should be either ignored by major candidates or another state should step up and go earlier or on January 1st if that is the earliest allowed.
Jul '11
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Brandon Zaffini
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
Paul receives more support from military members and veterans than any other GOP candidate.
First I ever heard it. Is there data that supports that?
-E
Nov '10
Re: Ron Paul Almost Catches Newt in Iowa
Ron Paul has the 4chan/Reddit vote.
While I don't think it's necessarily wise to base one's opinion on a thing based on its fans, it definitely gives me pause in this case.